681–690 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having a tool that’s 10% better doesn’t make your whole work 10% better though.
A "10% better" tool could make no difference, or it could make the work 100% better. The impact isn't linear.
I just bought a pro subscription. First impressions: The new o1-Pro model is an insanely good writer. Aside from favoring the long em-dash (—) which isn't on most keyboards, it has none of the quirks and tells of old GPT-4/4o/o1. It managed to totally fool every "AI writing detector" I ran it through. It can handle unusually long prompts. It appears to be very good at complex data analysis. I need to put it through i…
Writers love the em-dash though. It's a thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not how pricing works. If o1-pro is 10% better than Claude, but you are a guy who makes $300,000 per year, but now can make $330,000 because o1-pro makes you more productive, then it makes sense to give Sam $2,400.
The math is never this clean, and no one has ever experienced this (though I'm sure its a justification that was floated at OAI HQ at least once).
If paying this gets me two days of consulting it's a win for me.
Obvious caveat if cheaper setups get me the same, although I can't spend too long comparing or that time alone will cost more than just buying everything.
OpenAI is racing against two clocks: the commoditization clock (how quickly open-source alternatives catch up) and the monetization clock (their need to generate substantial revenue to justify their valuation). The ultimate success of this strategy depends on what we might call the enterprise AI adoption curve - whether large organizations will prioritize the kind of integrated, reliable, and "safe" AI solutions Open…
Why doesn't Pro include longer context windows? I'm a Plus member, and the biggest limitation I am running into by far is the maximum length of a context window. I'm having context fall out of scope throughout the conversion or not being able to give it a large document that I can then interrogate. So if I go from paying $20/month for 32,000 tokens, to $200/month for Pro, I expect something more akin to Enterprise's…
If a $200/month pro level is successful it could open the door to a $2000/month segment, and the $20,000/month segment will appear and the segregation of getting ahead with AI will begin.
Why doesn't Pro include longer context windows? I'm a Plus member, and the biggest limitation I am running into by far is the maximum length of a context window. I'm having context fall out of scope throughout the conversion or not being able to give it a large document that I can then interrogate. So if I go from paying $20/month for 32,000 tokens, to $200/month for Pro, I expect something more akin to Enterprise's…
If a $200/month pro level is successful it could open the door to a $2000/month segment, and the $20,000/month segment will appear and the segregation of getting ahead with AI will begin.
I actually pay 166 Euros a month for Claude Teams. Five seats. And I only use one. For myself. Why do I pay so much? Because the normal paid version (20 USD a month) interrups the chats after a dozen questions and wants me to wait a few hours until I can use it again. But Teams plan gives me way more questions. But why do I pay that much? Because Claude in combination with the Projects feature, where I can upload two…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This remind me why enterprise don't integrated OpenAI product into existing toolset, trust is root reason. It's hard to provide trust to OpenAI that they won't steal data of enterprise to train next model in a market where content is the most valuable element, compared office, cloud database, etc.
> It's hard to provide trust to OpenAI that they won't steal data of enterprise to train next model Bit of a cynical take. A company like OpenAI stands to lose enormously if anyone catches them doing dodgy shit in violation of their agreements with users. And it's very hard to keep dodgy behaviour secret in any decent sized company where any embittered employee can blow the whistle. VW only just managed it with Diese…
I know for a fact a major corporation I do work for is vehemently against any use of generative A.I. by its employees (just had that drilled into my head multiple times by their mandatory annual cybersecurity training), although I believe they are working towards getting some fully internal solution working at some point.
Kind of funny that Google includes generative A.I. answers by default now, so I still see those answers just by doing a Google search.
$200 per month means it must be good enough at your job to replicate and replace a meaningful fraction of your total work. Valid? For coding, probably. For other purposes I remain on the fence.